CJ grammar

[Gregory Robison]

Kampala, 11 February 1999

Tony: Sorry for the misunderstanding about my view of CJ grammar.  I didn't
mean to imply that it didn't have any, only that (to the limited extent of
my experience) it seemed to be less complete than that of a primary language
of a linguistic community.  This would be normal, I think, if it were an
ancillary code (trade language or other special-purpose mode of
communicating).  If you've got another language of long-standing in the
community, and in which the myths and place-names and proverbs and histories
of the people are already passed on and recounted, and which all the living
generations speak fluenty, it is likely that this language will be more
nuanced, have a broader, richer lexicon, and be the language of choice for
doing heavy-duty work such as, say, writing an epic poem or making a funeral
oration.  I read somewhere that Chief Seattle and his generation of leaders
(at least on the Sound) disdained CJ precisely because it wasn't a
sufficiently large canvas on which to display their considerable oratorical
skills.  Chief Seattle (like Charles de Gaulle and many other chiefs proud
of their eloquence) worked strictly through translators. (...and I can
already hear the eager footfalls of Dave at this very moment as he goes to
his impressive library to pluck the volume that will either confirm or
correct this fuzzy and no doubt incorrect memory of mine.)

I think Silverstein's point -- although I'm not saying that this was his
insight; I think it was common thinking among pidgin/creolists -- was that
when a pidgin creolizes (i.e., becomes some group's first language), then it
usually has to acquire the full (or a fuller) grammatical feature set that
it didn't have to have before.  How it does this -- what forms come into
being, or which older, existing forms are suddently pressed into service for
newly-needed grammatical functions -- is the interesting part, and that,
among other things, was what I thought he was looking at in the Jacobs
texts.  (Incidentally, my brush with Silverstein was also to dispute his
views -- although this was so long ago I can't remember his point or mine!
Also, I appreciate the Sarah Grey Thomason reference. Thanks!)

I would guess, too, that in the course of your fascinating and ambitious
project at Grand Ronde you might be faced with similar needs: if the CJ that
is recalled by the core of speakers behind the renaissance of the language
is in fact a pidgin version of CJ, and not a creole (if indeed there was a
creolized version that we could examine today), then some fundamentally new
grammatical forms will probably have to be invented or imported or
improvised somehow.

I'm sorry that I will have mostly anecdotal and trivial contributions to
make to this fascinating discussion group.  Thank-you for including me!

Klahowya,
Greg